20 March 2006

Australian Study Shows Chemotherapy Adds 2% to Survival Statistics





The Health Report: 18 April 2005 - Chemotherapy
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/helthrpt/stories/s1348333.htm

Norman Swan: Good morning Fran and welcome to the program. This morning on the Health Report globalisation writ small. Why go down the road for your surgery when you can avoid the waiting lists, get it cut price in another country and have a holiday with the money you've saved? A personal story involving new knees coming up.

And, has cancer chemotherapy, the use of drugs to treat malignancies been oversold? That's the clear implication of a paper published by some Australian cancer specialists, two of whom, perhaps non-coincidentally are radiation oncologists/radiotherapists.

Anyway in this summary of evidence, the assertion is that chemo has only added about 2% to cancer survival. The lead author is Association Professor Graeme Morgan who's at Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney. Is this, I wondered, an in house battle, the revenge of the radiotherapists?

Graeme Morgan: Well one could cynically say that but the reason I did it was that we were sick and tired of hearing about these new drugs and it wasn't really cementing into anything. And the reason for my doing the paper was to really show that there hasn't been any improvement in survival, or the improvement has been very, very modest despite all these new drugs and new combinations and bone marrow transplants.

Norman Swan: So what did you do in this study?

Graeme Morgan: Well what I did was that I took the major cancers and got their incidence from the Australian data sets and also got the breakdown of those cancers into their stages and also then compared that with the data from America.

Norman Swan: So you knew how many people were coming down with cancer per 100,000 of the population or whatever?

Graeme Morgan: Yes, we knew the exact number who were diagnosed in I think the years were 1998 and we then broke it down into the various stages and we looked at those stages what impact chemotherapy would have on a particular stage and a particular cancer.

08 March 2006

Excellent cancer article/video by Canadian Broadcasting Corporation




Chasing the cancer answer
Broadcast: March 5, 2006

In the next generation, the Canadian Cancer Society says almost one in two Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer. One in two.
WHAT CAUSES CANCER?

Cancer occurs when cells are triggered to grow abnormally. Triggers include genetics, radiation, and carcinogens.

It might be your husband, your daughter, your brother, your neighbour.

It might be you.

After Marketplace host Wendy Mesley was diagnosed, she began a long and personal journey. Along the way, she came across disturbing clues about why more Canadians than ever are getting sick.

When prevention isn't enough

Mesley says she thought she was doing everything right. The Canadian Cancer Society touts its seven steps to health:

ON THE RISE

1 in 2.3 men and 1 in 2.6 women will have cancer in their lifetime.
Don't smoke
* Eat your veggies
* Exercise
* Stay out of the sun
* Get screened regularly
* Visit your doctor and dentist regularly
* Avoid cancer-causing substances

Those are all great tips for healthy living - but like so many other Canadians with cancer, Mesley did all of them and still got the disease. Clearly, there must be something else going on.

The real cancer story is the fact that nearly one in two of us are going to get this disease.

05 March 2006

Borrelia: Just One of the Dozens of Organisms in Lyme Disease

Lyme disease: A Look Beyond Antibiotics
Dietrich K.Klinghardt, MD, PhD

In the last decade the majority of outcome-oriented physicians observed a major shift: we realized that it was neither the lack of vitamins or growth hormone that made our patients ill. We discovered that toxicity and chronic infections were most often at the core of the client’s suffering. We watched the discussion, which infection may be the primary one: mycoplasma, stealth viruses, HHV-6, trichomonas, Chlamydia pneumoniae, leptospirosis, mutated strep, or what else?

The new kid on the block is Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb) and some of us have looked at it for a long time as possibly being the bug that opens the door for all the other infections to enter the system. Lyme disease has become a buzzword in the alternative medical field. Since none of the recommended treatments are specific to either one of the microbes, we can never assume
that we really know what we treated once a patient has recovered.

Microbiologist Gitte Jensen, PhD had shown, that the older we get, the more foreign DNA is attached to our own DNA. Somewhere along the line pathogenic microbes invade the host’s DNA and become a permanent part of it. Since we use only 2% of our DNA, it may not be a problem. In fact, it may make us who we finally become. It may also cause a number of symptoms and chronic illness. Genius Guenther Enderlein’s discoveries take us off the hook: if one microbe can change into another given the right environment, why bother to find out, who we are infected with? The book “Lab 257” suggests that Bb is an escaped man-made US military bio-warfare organism (just like myoplasma incognitus and HHV 6).

04 March 2006

Avoid Benzene Contaminate Soft Drinks

FDA re-opens probe into benzene contamination of soft drinks

2/15/2006- US food safety authorities have re-opened an investigation closed 15 years ago into soft drinks contaminated with cancer-causing chemical benzene, following evidence the industry has failed to sort out the problem.

A chemist at the Food And Drug Administration (FDA) said testing in recent weeks had revealed some soft drinks contaminated with benzene at levels above the legal limit for water set by the US and Europe.

Benzene is listed as a poisonous chemical shown to increase the risk of leukaemia and other cancers.

The FDA was originally alerted in 1990 to the problem of benzene in soft drinks triggered by the preservative sodium benzoate. It never made the findings public, but came to an arrangement with the US soft drinks association that the industry would “get the word out”.

But in recent months, internal documents and private tests have begun to surface, supported by claims from a former chemist for Cadbury Schweppes, who is now keen to blow the whistle on the health risk involved. He and a US lawyer commissioned new tests that have now prompted the FDA to re-open the case.

These independent tests, performed by a laboratory in New York, found benzene levels in a couple of soft drinks two-and-a-half-times and five times above the World Health Organisation limit for drinking water (10 parts per billion).

The FDA now confirms it has found a similar problem in its own follow-up testing. “There were a few isolated products that have elevated levels. We certainly want to make sure there is some reformulation,” said an FDA chemist.

The problem is caused by two common ingredients – sodium benzoate and ascorbic acid (vitamin C) – which can react together to cause benzene formation. It is considered completely separate from other outbreaks of benzene contamination due to faulty packaging in the 1990s.